AN INSIDE LOOK - Commentary and opinions on local politics and life in general in Southeastern Massachusetts! Featuring the writings of Bill Gouveia, newspaper columnist for the Sun Chronicle and local cable TV talk show host. Feel free to read, comment and enjoy!

Monday, July 28, 2014

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Monday, July 28, 2014

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

Mansfield
School Superintendent Brenda Hodges – victim of a local political witch-hunt
and the internet age, or lazy administrator who disrespected her school system
and the town?That has been the topic of
some debate over the last few weeks.

Let
me try and settle that debate right now.

Every
one of the wounds that led to Superintendent Hodges ending her time in
Mansfield were self-inflicted.Not some
of them, not most of them, but all of them.She has absolutely no one to blame for her predicament other than
herself.

The
professional educator and administrator substantially copied a speech without
attributing her source.She did so at
her high school’s graduation, the pinnacle moment of achievement for Mansfield
students.Then she made light of her
transgression, acknowledging it in a limited manner only after being exposed by
some of her own students on social media.

When
planning her remarks to students, parents and citizens on the night her seniors
graduated, Superintendent Hodges was either unable or unwilling to come up with
original words.Instead she recycled a
speech she says she heard a pastor in Oklahoma give, one she says he gave her
permission to reuse.

Is
it too much to expect the leader of a school system that annually expends
millions of taxpayer dollars, and more importantly imparts upon students skills
and values they will carry with them forever, to at least be sincere?

If
she was so impressed with this speech, she could have easily prefaced her
remarks by saying “I’d like to share with you a speech I recently heard” and
mentioned the author.But she did not,
for reasons known only to herself.She
failed to adhere to the standard of honesty, integrity and personal
responsibility she regularly demanded from her students.

We
don’t know if Hodges would have been fired had she not retired and
resigned.The school committee kept
things very much under wraps, and did not share with the public the opinions of
individual members on the superintendent’s actions.

In
the private sector, that would be a wise business approach.In the public sector, it is seen as being
less than forthright.Though they were
no doubt limited by legal restrictions and contractual obligations, the school
committee owes the voters who elected them more in the way of explanation of
their role in the entire affair.

Last
week in Newton, the school superintendent was caught up in a similar
controversy.Weeks after giving two graduation
speeches in which he used excerpts from a speech by Governor Deval Patrick
without attribution, Superintendent David Fleischman was disciplined by his
school committee.

Committee
members voted to fine Fleischman one week’s salary for his transgression.He admitted his mistake while stopping short
of saying he was guilty of plagiarism.

Frankly,
he got off easy.

The
Newton High School newspaper and writer Jordan Cohen-Kaplan said it best when
he wrote:“It is disappointing and disillusioning
to imagine we cannot expect the best from the highest ranking Newton Public
Schools official, especially on a widely attended day designed to celebrate
student achievement and serve as an educational capstone.”

Is
it fair that Fleischman gets to keep his job while Hodges seems to have been
forced out?Probably not, but each
community has its own standards and each superintendent has their own strengths
and weaknesses.Fairness does not really
figure into the equation.

But
as Hodges walks off the Mansfield scene (complete with plentiful accumulated
sick time) let there be no doubt she figuratively dug her own grave.Yet she continues to deny she is the problem.

Upon
submitting her resignation, Hodges said in a letter:“Moving forward, I do not believe the school
system can continue to make the progress it has made if this issue remains a
distraction.”

Agreed,
Superintendent.But you caused the
distraction.You are responsible for
it.You are not leaving because the
distraction exists, you are leaving because you created it.You cost yourself the respect necessary to
be able to perform your duties at a proficient level.

So
after careful and objective consideration, the clear answer to the opening
question is - lazy administrator who disrespected her school system and the
town.

Without a
doubt.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and
longtime local official.He can be
emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at
@Billinsidelook.

Those
oft-quoted words are from a sonnet called The New Colossus written by
Emma Lazarus in 1883. In 1903 they were
engraved on a plaque and placed near the base of the Statue of liberty, where
they have helped celebrate both freedom and immigrants for well over a century.

But
much like the late Emma, those words have been forgotten and ignored by many in
America. The metaphorical lamp Lady
Liberty lifts so high might as well be a giant stop light, given what many in
our great country are saying and urging these days.

Immigration
reform is a hot topic. Unfortunately, the
country is so polarized on the issue that all we can really accomplish is to
fight with ourselves. As we come out of
the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, we seem to have become a
nation more concerned with denying others success and opportunity than actually
achieving those things ourselves.

In
the last few years there has been a tremendous surge in children illegally
entering the country from Central American nations where gang violence has
escalated to unprecedented levels. Parents
are sending their young kids off on their own to a place many have only read
about, most with nowhere to go and no family to support them when they arrive.

Why
are they doing it? Because they want
their children to live. Because the children’s
chances of surviving in their home country are slim. Because they are out of options. And because they love them.

To
be sure, there are some bad parents and children involved in this. Some kids who cross the border illegally are
gang members. Some are running drugs. Some are fleeing criminal prosecution in
their own land.

But
most of them are just children running for their lives. They are crossing the border illegally and
surrendering themselves to the first uniformed person they see. They are running towards the place history
books tell them is the beacon of freedom, a place different from any other
country in the world.

And
many here want them sent back to the hell they escaped. Despite the fact our own law, passed by the
administration of George W. Bush, says we cannot legally deport them for two
years. Many believe we should not have
to bear the cost of detaining them and determining if they have legal grounds
for requesting asylum.

Just
ship them back, we are told. If they
die, they die. Do you know the problems
they are causing us? We have to house
them. We have to feed them. We have to clothe them. And what do we get in return?

Do
you know some of them have lice? Why
should we possibly get lice just because some foreign kids want to live and be
free, or have a future? Surely our right
to avoid lice is more important than their lives?

It’s
pretty plain they are all just coming here for the food stamps and those
luxurious abandoned military bases. They
want to go on welfare, get in-state tuition, and collect unemployment for the
rest of their lives. They’re all the
same, you know.

None
of them will ever amount to anything, or become productive members of our
society. They will never start
businesses and employ people, or serve in our military, or become hard-working
taxpayers. They steal all those
low-level jobs we Americans complain about but won’t actually work
ourselves. Why should we allow them to
stay?

In
all seriousness, we cannot continue to accept thousands of children streaming
illegally across our borders. We must
address not only the problem of border security, but the reasons these kids are
coming here in the first place. We have
to help make them safe in their own land, because we are America and that is
what we do.

Or
at least, it’s what we used to do. You
know, back when that lady with the torch was seen as lighting the way instead
of burning the bridges.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and
longtime local official. He can be
emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at
@Billinsidelook.

Friday, July 11, 2014

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Friday, July 11, 2014

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

Every time
I think I’m going to teach my six-year old grandson something important, I end
up being the one who learns a lesson.

Each year
my wife and I take our oldest grandchild Will (did I mention his name is
William?) on a trip to New Hampshire.He
is the only one of our three grandkids old enough to steal away on vacation for
several days, though we keep plotting to include the other two soon.

This year marked our fifth consecutive trip with young Will to the
Great North.We always stay in a hotel
that includes either a pool and/or a water park to keep him busy.Up until this past year we also went to
nearby StoryLand which excited him to no end.

On this
journey we shook things up a bit.We
visited Santa’s Village instead, and we also went to a nearby alpine slide
where Will experienced his first ski-lift and first viewing of Grandpa’s
terrified face as we hurtled down the side of a mountain.We went on a new mountain coaster, visited an
amazing trail and waterfall, and were in the water park every day of our trip.

In
addition, we did the auto road up Mt. Washington – something that scared Will
almost as much as it did his grandparents.We took pictures at the summit and both on the way up and down.It was a very exciting time for us all.

But after
all that effort, all that planning, and all that expense – this year’s trip
will always be known and remembered by our grandson as “TheTrip of the Moose
and the Bear.”And that part didn’t cost
us a cent.

We were
coming back from our alpine slide adventure, driving along Route 16 just
outside of North Conway.Suddenly Will
shouted from the back seat.

“Grandma!Grandpa!It’s a moose!We have to stop!”

My wife
pulled the car over to the side of the road, joined by several other
motorists.Sure enough, there was a
young moose taking a drink from a large puddle along the wooded roadside.He (or she for all I know) was taking his
time, keeping a wary eye on the people now snapping pictures from a safe
distance.

If it had
been up to Will, we would have shaken hands with the moose.But he settled for standing nearby and
getting his picture taken with the wild animal in the background.Will excitedly told us he had never seen a
real live moose before, and it was not until the skittish creature bounded off
into the woods that we could get him back in the car.

Once again
in his seat, Will wanted to call his parents and tell them about his amazing
experience.But first we decided to stop
at a nearby Dairy Queen and get a treat before breaking his big news.

We were in
line for ice cream when a man and his young son who had been at the moose
sighting walked in and recognized us.“Did you see the bear out behind the building?” the youngster asked Will
excitedly.Unable to believe he could be
this lucky, Will glanced up at me and asked if we could go outside and take a
look.

Sure
enough, there was a good-sized black bear attempting to climb some pallets
stacked behind the Dairy Queen.Again,
Will wanted to go make friends.Again, I
explained he would have to settle for a very long-distance photo op.Grandma came out with our ice cream, and we
sat watching the bear until it got bored and ran away.

When Will
called his parents, he could barely (pun intended) contain himself.Forgotten was the water park fun, the climb
up the mountain, the roller coaster, the alpine slide, and Santa’s Village.All he could talk about was that he had seen
a moose and a bear.

And that is
as it should be.He reminded us what
vacations are truly all about.And the
more excited he got, the more we realized the moose and the bear were now also
the highlight of the trip for us.

It’s
astounding what you can learn from a six year old…

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and
longtime local official.He can be
emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Tuesday, July 8, 2014

This column originally appeared in The Sun Chronicle on Monday, July 7, 2014

AN INSIDE LOOK

By Bill Gouveia

There was
always going to be a statewide election this fall, including a race for
Governor.But now it will be different
from any other ever held in the Bay State.Hold on to your hats folks – the political winds will soon be escalating
to hurricane force level.

When the
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled last week that repealing the current
“casino law” could be placed on the ballot this year, the political rules and
landscape were immediately and severely altered.You can throw out all the usual election
philosophies, rules and assumptions if this question is on the same ballot as
our elected state officials.It’s a sure
bet this election will be all about legalized gambling.

Massachusetts
has always been both hypocritical and schizophrenic when it comes to betting.It is as though our puritanical roots and our
liberal leanings can only find common ground in how we project our public
position on gambling.We say one thing,
while doing another.

In general,
Massachusetts residents like to gamble.We have long been home to one of the most successful state lotteries in
the country.We flock to casinos in
Connecticut and other nearby states in search of winnings.Casino operators in Las Vegas will tell you
Massachusetts residents are prime customers.And underground and illegal sports betting has been supporting the
families of Boston bookies for many generations.

But we don’t
like to see it where we live.We prefer
pretending we are above it all.Casinos
are for visiting, not having within our pristine borders.Oh no – we can’t have that, even if it does
bring in billions in revenue and ancillary business.

Gambling
preys on the poor, we are told.It is socially
unfair.And the gaming companies are
unfeeling corporate entities that bring corruption and backroom deals to our
already political state.

Corruption?Here in Massachusetts?Surely you jest.You mean to say there may be corporate
entities seeking to spend money and peddle influence in order to advance their
own success?Oh my, how out of the
ordinary that would be compared to other types of industry located here.

And
apparently we will save those “poor people” by making sure legalized gambling
is located just on the other side of the state line.That way we can fulfill our gambling urges
while still maintaining the façade that we are above the fray.Apparently, appearance is everything.

Legalized
casino opponents would rather see us drive residents to illegal betting, where
there are no regulations to ensure fairness and the collection efforts tend to
be a bit more extreme.The poor are
still victimized in this scenario, but it is harder to see them from the
comfort of our high moral perches.

But now
gambling will be the main issue, with money being tossed around on both sides –
especially the pro-casino groups.And as
we know, money is the lifeblood of politics in America.Massachusetts is no exception.

This will
be a major issue in helping voters to choose candidates for statewide
office.While most running for office
would like to ignore it and let the people decide the issue, they cannot and
they know it.

You need
only look back a few years to Foxboro for an example of how this next election
may be affected.In 2012 gambling
technically was not on the ballot, but everyone knew the local election was a
referendum on allowing a casino locally.The turnout was tremendous, way above average.Candidates handily lost their races with vote
totals that would have easily won any other year.

At least 20
states have legalized casino gambling.Others have “Indian” casinos run by Native American tribes.As with other industries, some are more
successful than others.

But
gambling itself will not be on the ballot this fall.No matter how the electorate votes,
Massachusetts residents will continue to gamble.The question now is, will they do it here in
a regulated or non-regulated setting and will the state collect taxes and
benefit from new construction and new jobs?

This
approach didn’t work during Prohibition, and it won’t work now.

One thing
is certain - between today and November, pollsters are going to make a boatload
of money.You can bet on that.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and
longtime local official.He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.com and followed on Twitter at
@Billinsidelook.

GOUVEIA: Still a question of integrity

If a student of Mansfield School Superintendent Brenda Hodges submitted a speech or paper which was found to be largely copied from another source, and did not credit that source, that student would have some serious explaining to do.

But apparently in Mansfield, those in positions of power are held to a different standard. What some have dismissed as something "blown out of proportion" is now threatening the very integrity of the school system itself.

Charges of plagiarism began to circulate on social media after the June 8 Mansfield High graduation address by the superintendent. It seems Hodges' remarks were extremely similar to those given by Naval Adm. William H. McRaven at the University of Texas less than a month earlier.

The superintendent denies she is guilty of plagiarism, saying she heard a speech in Oklahoma in 2013 and asked the speaker (whom she declined to identify) if she could use it. She says he handed her a copy, and she drew from that for her message to graduating seniors.

But she does admit she should have handled the situation differently. "In hindsight, I would have said 'I recently heard a speech that resonated with me and I'd like to share some thoughts from it with you'," Hodges said recently. She added she had not seen or read the admiral's speech before giving her own, but was able to clearly see the connection.

Mansfield High claims to take plagiarism very seriously. Students often have to submit their work to a website that checks for similarities to other written or spoken materials. Hodges herself has pointed out the school department instills in the students, "You have to cite your sources."

Yes, superintendent - you do. And you didn't. And for that, there needs to be consequences.

Plagiarism is a tricky concept. It is debatable whether this particular instance rises to the level of actual plagiarism. But there is no question what Hodges did was wrong, irresponsible and unprofessional. She has damaged her own integrity and credibility with students, parents and fellow professional staff and administrators.

But it's just a commencement speech, you might be tempted to say. Why make such a big deal out of a few remarks to graduates and their families? The head of the school's English department called the alleged plagiarism "much ado about nothing."

That is wrong. It is a big deal. The school department has been quite clear about citing sources. This not only fails to set a good example, but is the epitome of a bad one.

Very little that is written or said is truly and completely original. As a columnist, I draw information for virtually every column from a wide variety of sources. If I gave attribution to every stray fact or statement I encountered, there would be little room for anything else.

But if I were to copy much of what I wrote directly from someone else's work, I would have to attribute it. To not do so would be dishonest and get me fired.

When you are the head of a school system, your responsibilities are clear. You have to be able to conform to the standards and behavior you expect and demand from students. The concept of "Do what I say, not what I do" doesn't work.

What would Superintendent Hodges do if one of her students virtually copied a speech or paper from another source? If they told the superintendent they had permission from someone else to use their work, would that make it OK? Or would they face disciplinary action for failure to follow the rules?

Superintendents and students are different and should not be treated exactly the same. That is understood. But in this case, they should both abide by basic principles of right and wrong.

The school committee needs to investigate this matter. Continued failure to take this seriously will result in its own integrity being questioned. And if it is confirmed Superintendent Hodges did indeed operate outside the very rules she is charged with enforcing, she should be subjected to disciplinary action.

There appears to be no valid excuse for what has been done here. And until and unless one is forthcoming, the school committee needs to show the community their lofty standards apply to everyone.

Bill Gouveia is a local columnist and longtime area town official. He can be emailed at aninsidelook@aol.comand followed on Twitter at @Billinsidelook.

Remembering Baby Alex

Bill's Favorite Links

Followers

About Me

Bill Gouveia
Bill has been a newspaper columnist for the Sun Chronicle in Attleboro, MA for more than a decade, as well as former host of his own local cable talk show "An Inside Look" in his hometown of Norton, MA. Bill previously wrote columns for the Norton Mirror, Mansfield News and Easton Journal for about ten years, and Norton Patch as well, and is a former selectman in Norton. He is currently the elected Norton Town Moderator. His real-time job is as Vice President of Atlantic Stainless Co., Inc - a stainless steel distributorship in North Attleboro, MA. He and his wife Cynthia have been married for 40 years and have two sons, Aaron and Nathan. He is also the proud grandfather of William Gouveia, Avery Gouveia, Samuel Gouveia, Addison Gouveia and Thomas Gouveia.